Ditch the red-light camera program

New Jersey's red-light cameras have plenty of critics, but few are as relentless - and with the ability to actually do something about them - as Assemblyman Declan O'Scanlon, a Republican from Red Bank.

O'Scanlon has long complained that the cameras are more about generating revenue than safety, and we agree. The cameras have served as a cash cow for many of the communities in which they're already been installed, prompting officials in other towns to clamor for their own cameras, while publicly claiming that the goal is to make dangerous intersections safer.

But critics like O'Scanlon have said that it's all little more than a money-grab, with vehicle owners being ticketed for many false violations and other technical violations for which any meaningful police discretion has been eliminated.

Opponents of the cameras saw their arguments strengthened last year with the discovery that yellow lights at many of the intersections with red-light cameras were mistimed, giving drivers less time than they should have had to pass through those intersections under the yellow. The camera program was temporarily suspended, until all of the relevant lights could be recalibrated and certified by the state Department of Transportation.

Now this week, O'Scanlon said that an expert video analysis has shown that many other yellow lights where the traffic cameras are present remain too short, leaving drivers unduly vulnerable to tickets. The disparities may seem minor - the longest discrepancy was about a quarter of a second. But assuming O'Scanlon's facts are correct, the end result is undoubtedly more tickets - and more revenue for the host communities, and the companies operating the cameras - than should legally be distributed at those intersections.

Some drivers are being cheated by the cameras, and that will continue, because every fraction of a second means more revenue. If the program expands, more cameras will mean even less ability to consistently monitor the devices for fairness.

The tradeoff for all of this is supposed to be safety, both in the reduction of accidents and by changing the behavior of drivers as they become accustomed to the presence of the cameras. But the results - here and in other states with similar programs - have been mixed. Supporters say that at the very least reducing the number of more serious "T-bone" mid-intersection accidents is worth an increase in rear-end collisions.

But where do we draw the lines on increased safety? There are many things government can do to make our roadways safer, but that doesn't mean all of them should be done, or that we'd want them to be done. Speed limits on every road could be reduced by 20 miles an hour. Speeders could face prison sentences. That would reduce the number and severity of accidents, but is it worth the price?

We are also weary of the disingenuous defense of the cameras from local officials. Even skeptics may acknowledge that there are some safety benefits, but the cameras are most of all about pulling more money of the public's pocket. That's clear, and that's why those responsible for the cameras can't be trusted to operate them fairly, as we continue to see with the yellow-light discrepancies. The red-light camera program should be ended.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Ditch the red-light camera program

New Jersey's red-light cameras have plenty of critics, but few are as relentless ? and with the ability to actually do something about them ? as Assemblyman Declan O'Scanlon, a Republican from Red

A link to this page will be included in your message.

Real Deals

Sales, coupons, circulars and more from your favorite Morris County area retailers.